If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Oh, I didn't really think he was wrong. If we actually had reliable numbers, I'd expect that probably pretty close to 100% of the deaths are related in some way to an existing condition, and respiratory problems are the main culprit.

Not true at all. Plenty of reports of otherwise healthy people dying. And some of the underlying conditions are very minor, such as light asthma, or very common, such as high blood pressure. Of course, we can't be sure of anything at this point. But you're not likely to find many people above the age of 50 who don't have SOME minor health issue (whether they know it or not).

Not true at all. Plenty of reports of otherwise healthy people dying. And some of the underlying conditions are very minor, such as light asthma, or very common, such as high blood pressure. Of course, we can't be sure of anything at this point. But you're not likely to find many people above the age of 50 who don't have SOME minor health issue (whether they know it or not).

"Plenty" is one of those vague, subjective quantities that tells me that you and I will never agree on these numbers, because we're going to see them differently.

I will agree with your last sentence, though. The older you are, the more at-risk you are from this or any sickness.

I dunno, even if they gave $1,200 to every man, woman, and child (instead of $500 per child), that's still not even $400 billion unless my calculator is broken. And I don't know about anyone else but a $100 billion dollar discrepancy is not something I can easily overlook.

The cash payments are estimated to add up to $300 billion. The $560 billion for "individuals" is a combined total with the expansion of unemployment benefits, estimated at $260 billion. There is no discrepancy, although that $260 billion is likely to be off, because it's hard to predict how many people will collect it.

The residents of the various territories (such as Puerto Rico) will also be eligible - so that accounts for somewhere around 4.5 billion in direct payments.

Makes sense, thank you.

Originally Posted by j_factor

The cash payments are estimated to add up to $300 billion. The $560 billion for "individuals" is a combined total with the expansion of unemployment benefits, estimated at $260 billion. There is no discrepancy, although that $260 billion is likely to be off, because it's hard to predict how many people will collect it.

Yeah, okay, they add up to $300 billion. But how? I do not see what is wrong with asking exactly how they are coming up with these figures. I also don't like all the vague add-ons that are millions and even billions of dollars. In the example that I previously gave, how do they figure one hundred senators need $10 million to work from home? Like they don't already have secure phones, internet connections, and computers already? Not to mention they probably even already have home offices and servants. Regular folks out there would probably give their eye-teeth to work from home or even be able to work at all right now.

I think the news media is dropping the ball by not asking some hard questions about where the money is going when there are plenty of people in real need. It even annoys me how they keep saying "$2 trillion" instead of $2.2 trillion; the point-two alone is a ton of money. All I keep reading is how people are getting $1,200 tax-free, as if that's the big story here.

Look, this isn't about me thinking someone is pocketing or me wanting more money. I'm not even sure that I'm getting any. Budget advice always includes knowing where your money is going and I see no reason not to know it here.

"Plenty" is one of those vague, subjective quantities that tells me that you and I will never agree on these numbers, because we're going to see them differently.

I will agree with your last sentence, though. The older you are, the more at-risk you are from this or any sickness.

The numbers are available, if you would take the time to look them up. This entire thread you've shown no evidence of having actually looked into any of the stuff you are saying. Your ignorance seriously frightens me - not saying that to be mean, but to urge you to value facts more than your gut instinct.

Reports from China put the mortality rate for people without pre-existing conditions at 0.9%, meaning if you don't have any pre-existing conditions and you get the virus then there's a 0.9% chance that you will die (source).

In the UK, 5% of deaths have been in people without pre-existing conditions (source), and the same in Louisiana (source).

"Obesity" and "high blood pressure" are defined as pre-existing conditions, and those are extremely common conditions.

Young people without pre-existing conditions have died from COVID-19, such as this 21-year-old woman in the UK. There are many more such anecdotal accounts in the news. Yes, they're exceptional, but they are happening.

I suspect you are trying to downplay the seriousness of the virus, as you've continuously tried to do in this thread. I just can't understand that at all.

Yeah, okay, they add up to $300 billion. But how? I do not see what is wrong with asking exactly how they are coming up with these figures. I also don't like all the vague add-ons that are millions and even billions of dollars. In the example that I previously gave, how do they figure one hundred senators need $10 million to work from home? Like they don't already have secure phones, internet connections, and computers already? Not to mention they probably even already have home offices and servants. Regular folks out there would probably give their eye-teeth to work from home or even be able to work at all right now.

I think the news media is dropping the ball by not asking some hard questions about where the money is going when there are plenty of people in real need. It even annoys me how they keep saying "$2 trillion" instead of $2.2 trillion; the point-two alone is a ton of money. All I keep reading is how people are getting $1,200 tax-free, as if that's the big story here.

Look, this isn't about me thinking someone is pocketing or me wanting more money. I'm not even sure that I'm getting any. Budget advice always includes knowing where your money is going and I see no reason not to know it here.

I could probably answer you in specifics if I spent all day digging into the provisions of the bill. I'm not doing that, but the information is out there. The figures given for each section of the bill aren't just wild guesstimates on a piece of paper. In any case if you are worried about knowing where the money is going, you are focused on the wrong side of the bill anyway. Sending people checks isn't really that complicated, or subject to huge cost variation, so I think we do know where that money is going for the most part. The outlays for corporations, local governments, education, and even hospitals are less defined and more discretionary.

The numbers are available, if you would take the time to look them up. This entire thread you've shown no evidence of having actually looked into any of the stuff you are saying. Your ignorance seriously frightens me - not saying that to be mean, but to urge you to value facts more than your gut instinct.

Reports from China put the mortality rate for people without pre-existing conditions at 0.9%, meaning if you don't have any pre-existing conditions and you get the virus then there's a 0.9% chance that you will die (source).

In the UK, 5% of deaths have been in people without pre-existing conditions (source), and the same in Louisiana (source).

"Obesity" and "high blood pressure" are defined as pre-existing conditions, and those are extremely common conditions.

Young people without pre-existing conditions have died from COVID-19, such as this 21-year-old woman in the UK. There are many more such anecdotal accounts in the news. Yes, they're exceptional, but they are happening.

I suspect you are trying to downplay the seriousness of the virus, as you've continuously tried to do in this thread. I just can't understand that at all.

And from the beginning Iíve maintained that there is reason for concern. Concern, mind you... not outright panic.

Did you know that in the last few weeks, the suicide rate has spiked dramatically in my county (and Iím assuming many other areas)? So much so that the law enforcement is being aggressively pro-active with their suicide-prevention methods? Thatís how much fear and dread the media is raining down upon us right now.

What if your pest control guy came to you and said he discovered evidence of a poisonous spider in your house, and that if you got bitten, youíd have a 1% chance of dying from it? Would you panic and burn your house down?

You say Iím downplaying the severity of this virus and yet in the same breath you tell me that the mortality rate is less than 1%. And that, of that less-than-1%, 5% of the people who have died were ďperfectly healthy.Ē

Again... why do you think this is cause for people to lose their minds? Why are you not more concerned about the staggering amount of suffering that is headed our way because people are going to be without income for months? Employees all over the globe have been sitting at home, with no guarantee that theyíll even have a job to go back to when this is all over, because the businesses they worked for could not recover from this. Itís great that the government is handing out money, but what good is $1200 going to do?

Itís pretty obvious that you see things differently, but I for one would rather take that risk - which is again so small that it barely even registers as a ďriskĒ - than lose my job, my house, my kidís welfare, and nearly everything my wife and I own.

So donít bother trying to convince me with your numbers anymore. They arenít scary. If you want to live your life in complete terror, thatís your choice. Thatís not how I live my life, nor is it how I try to raise my kids. I would urge everyone else to not let their minds get poisoned by the doom-cryers. Use a bit more common sense and reason. Donít hide out in your sterile homes (assuming you still have a choice). Vitamin D and fresh air is good for you. I think if nothing else, weíve all learned that we donít wash our hands nearly as much as we should, so keep that up.

And from the beginning Iíve maintained that there is reason for concern. Concern, mind you... not outright panic.

Did you know that in the last few weeks, the suicide rate has spiked dramatically in my county (and Iím assuming many other areas)? So much so that the law enforcement is being aggressively pro-active with their suicide-prevention methods? Thatís how much fear and dread the media is raining down upon us right now.

What if your pest control guy came to you and said he discovered evidence of a poisonous spider in your house, and that if you got bitten, youíd have a 1% chance of dying from it? Would you panic and burn your house down?

You say Iím downplaying the severity of this virus and yet in the same breath you tell me that the mortality rate is less than 1%. And that, of that less-than-1%, 5% of the people who have died were ďperfectly healthy.Ē

Again... why do you think this is cause for people to lose their minds? Why are you not more concerned about the staggering amount of suffering that is headed our way because people are going to be without income for months? Employees all over the globe have been sitting at home, with no guarantee that theyíll even have a job to go back to when this is all over, because the businesses they worked for could not recover from this. Itís great that the government is handing out money, but what good is $1200 going to do?

Itís pretty obvious that you see things differently, but I for one would rather take that risk - which is again so small that it barely even registers as a ďriskĒ - than lose my job, my house, my kidís welfare, and nearly everything my wife and I own.

So donít bother trying to convince me with your numbers anymore. They arenít scary. If you want to live your life in complete terror, thatís your choice. Thatís not how I live my life, nor is it how I try to raise my kids. I would urge everyone else to not let their minds get poisoned by the doom-cryers. Use a bit more common sense and reason. Donít hide out in your sterile homes (assuming you still have a choice). Vitamin D and fresh air is good for you. I think if nothing else, weíve all learned that we donít wash our hands nearly as much as we should, so keep that up.

I completely agree. What is needed here are swift and practical measures to ensure that this doesn't get any worse than it is. Deep concern is appropriate, not blind panic. We'll make it through this together. Also you're quite right when you say that the wholesale damage that this crisis will have on the world's economy is going to be far scarier than anything Covid-19 throws at us. The unemployment figures in both my country and yours are now truly staggering, and it's only going to get worse as more companies go to the wall.

ē I'm not sure whether that 0.9% figure (or any figure) for China is accurate, but note that it's the rate for people "without pre-existing conditions", not the overall mortality rate. And one hell of a lot of people have pre-existing conditions.

ē That overall mortality rate varies wildly by country, and no one is sure why. Italy's in the double digits, Germany's a tenth of that, and simple explanations ("Italians are old and close talkers, haha") don't suffice here.

ē That mortality rate is based on patients receiving optimal hospital care. If the hospitals get overwhelmed and you're receiving sub-optimal care, or no care, the mortality rate will be much, much higher -- it certainly could reach 12%, the rate of cases requiring hospitalization in China. I'm not sure why some people don't understand this: if the hospitals get overwhelmed, we could be utterly fucked.

ē The opinion or behavior of "the media" has no relevance in evaluating the seriousness of this threat. The people to look to are doctors, nurses, epidemiologists, etc. -- and they're very, very, very worried, and have been for months.

ē This thing is contagious as fuck, generates tons of asymptomatic carriers, has been killing medical professionals left and right, and may have all kinds of long-term effects on those who recover. SARS and MERS caused permanent lung damage in tons of survivors, and this virus is likely to do the same for any case requiring hospitalization.

ē I don't really know what MDB's "deep concern is appropriate, not blind panic" means in policy terms -- but if I had to guess, I think the subtext is a claim that "the damage done by shutting down is worse than the damage done by COVID-19, so we should open things back up ASAP". I don't agree.

ē Handwashing isn't enough to contain this virus; it stays in the air for extended periods of time. No matter how virtuously you behave, or what supplements you take, you can and will get this thing if everyone resumes their normal lives as of tomorrow. Oh, and remember, men are clearly getting more severe cases than women.

ē If you've ever watched someone die of respiratory failure, you probably have a different perspective on this than if you haven't. It's a horrible way to go, and that's with treatment to ease the symptoms. Without it...

So donít bother trying to convince me with your numbers anymore. They arenít scary. If you want to live your life in complete terror, thatís your choice. Thatís not how I live my life, nor is it how I try to raise my kids. I would urge everyone else to not let their minds get poisoned by the doom-cryers. Use a bit more common sense and reason. Donít hide out in your sterile homes (assuming you still have a choice). Vitamin D and fresh air is good for you. I think if nothing else, weíve all learned that we donít wash our hands nearly as much as we should, so keep that up.

I don't see anybody panicking in this thread. I see you continuously acting like this virus is not worth the reaction that it has received from experts around the world.

The very thing you are worried about - the economy, your family, your livelihood - are threatened by people such as yourself who refuse to take this seriously.

If people would just follow proper isolation and distancing practices, we would be able to return to our normal lives far quicker. Instead, the virus continues to spread because people can't simply stay home for a few weeks.

This is one of the things you said previously in this thread:

Originally Posted by MrMatthews

They say that the elderly are most at risk from this thing, and I believe that. So... my wife and I are keeping away from our parents and grandparents. Weíre advising them to stay indoors and let us know if they need anything. We all go through the same routine during flu season (Iím pretty sure that if I looked into who the flu kills every year, itís essentially the same demographic). Whatís wrong with everyone using their own common sense and making their own decisions? If my dad wants to assume the risk (and Iím assuming he does), thatís ultimately on him. Not you or me.

That is just plain ignorant. THAT is the shit that is hurting the global economy so much right now. You want things to get better? Stay home.

The most recent projections from the US government are that even with strict isolation measures, they're estimating 100,000 to 200,000 deaths in the country. Without isolation measures, the projection is over 2 million deaths.

Anyone who continues to downplay the seriousness of the situation, continues to socialize, continues to put the burden on those most at risk, is making the situation worse for all due to pure selfishness. Is that really what you want?

Anyone who continues to downplay the seriousness of the situation, continues to socialize, continues to put the burden on those most at risk, is making the situation worse for all due to pure selfishness. Is that really what you want?

Wake up, dude: the world runs because people go to work. If no one goes to work, the world stops turning and everyone suffers. So on one hand, you have a virus that will directly affect a very small percentage of us (in varying degrees, at that). On the other hand, we are plunging into a global economic crisis which will affect 100% of us.

I remember our last recession. It sucked. Just out of curiosity, were you old enough to work back then?

How about this: itís none of my business what you do. If this virus scares you and you feel like the risk is simply not worth it, then stay inside. I donít mean you specifically, I mean people like you. You people isolate yourselves: no judgement. The rest of us will keep the world turning until a vaccine is developed (which, spoiler alert, may still not guarantee your survival). Iíll even forfeit my stimulus check, you can have it. Me being outside is not a burden to any of you: quite the opposite, in fact.

But if you think for a second that itís possible for EVERYONE to stay inside for even two weeks, you are kidding yourself. Not gonna happen. I suppose you think that doctors, first responders, firefighters, and police officers should stay at home, too? How about all those homeless people? I suppose you think they should get all rounded up and locked up? Under the pretense of ďpublic safety?Ē All of these things will have to happen for your scenario to work.

One more question for you: you think we should make a sacrifice for the good of the world. Well, i think we should make a sacrifice for the good of the world, too. Your sacrifice helps us short-term, but creates problems later. My sacrifice helps us long-term, but potentially creates problems now. Why would you expect that I would ever see things your way?

I don't see anybody panicking in this thread. I see you continuously acting like this virus is not worth the reaction that it has received from experts around the world.

The very thing you are worried about - the economy, your family, your livelihood - are threatened by people such as yourself who refuse to take this seriously.

If people would just follow proper isolation and distancing practices, we would be able to return to our normal lives far quicker. Instead, the virus continues to spread because people can't simply stay home for a few weeks.

This is one of the things you said previously in this thread:

That is just plain ignorant. THAT is the shit that is hurting the global economy so much right now. You want things to get better? Stay home.

The most recent projections from the US government are that even with strict isolation measures, they're estimating 100,000 to 200,000 deaths in the country. Without isolation measures, the projection is over 2 million deaths.

Anyone who continues to downplay the seriousness of the situation, continues to socialize, continues to put the burden on those most at risk, is making the situation worse for all due to pure selfishness. Is that really what you want?

From where I'm looking from it seems most people have got the message. In the area where I live most people are abiding by the social distancing having realized that a sudden spike in serious cases of COVID 19 would quickly overwhelm the emergency services in the area and emergency rooms which would have then create an even bigger crisis similar to what is happening in Italy and Spain (good luck in surviving heart attacks/strokes/ trauma injuries if all the hospitals are full of people with "the flu"). My wife and I are our splitting the days between working remotely from home, looking after our medically fragile son, going out to exercise and get necessary food and medications as needed.

Nobody is saying 'it's just the flu'. We know it's more serious than that. What MrMatty and I are saying is that it's the aftermath of this that should be scaring people, not the virus itself. This will be gone in a few months, the global aftereffects will be with us for years! Also can we please put Covid-19 into some sort of perspective, it's not a fraction as deadly as the 'Spanish Flu' of 1918, nor is it going to wipe out half the world's population like the bubonic plague did in Medieval times. Covid-19 seems to predominantly affect the weak and those with compromised immune systems, with a few exceptions here and there. It is not a wholesale killer like the two historical pandemics I mentioned. Context is so important in an age of hysteria.